On 6/24/2010 5:06 AM, Henrik Rydberg wrote:
> Hi Joonyoung,
> [...]
>>> +static void qt602240_input_read(struct qt602240_data *data)
>>> +{
>>> + struct qt602240_message message;
>>> + struct qt602240_object *object;
>>> + struct device *dev = &data->client->dev;
>>> + struct input_dev *input_dev = data->input_dev;
>>> + u8 reportid;
>>> + u8 max_reportid;
>>> + u8 min_reportid;
>>> +
>>> +repeat:
>>> + if (qt602240_read_message(data, &message)) {
>>> + dev_err(dev, "Failed to read message\n");
>>> + return;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + reportid = message.reportid;
>>> +
>>> + /* Check it remains the message to process */
>>> + if (reportid == 0xff)
>>> + return;
>>> +
>>> + /* whether reportid is thing of QT602240_TOUCH_MULTI */
>>> + object = qt602240_get_object(data, QT602240_TOUCH_MULTI);
>>> + if (!object)
>>> + return;
>>> +
>>> + max_reportid = object->max_reportid;
>>> + min_reportid = max_reportid - object->num_report_ids + 1;
>>> +
>>> + if ((reportid >= min_reportid) && (reportid <= max_reportid)) {
>>> + u8 id;
>>> + u8 status;
>>> + int x;
>>> + int y;
>>> + int area;
>>> + int finger_num = 0;
>>> +
>>> + id = reportid - min_reportid;
>>> + status = message.message[0];
>>> +
>>> + /* Check the touch is present on the screen */
>>> + if (!(status & QT602240_DETECT))
>>> + goto release;
>>> +
>>> + /* Check only AMP detection */
>>> + if (!(status & (QT602240_PRESS | QT602240_MOVE)))
>>> + goto repeat;
>>> +
>>> + x = (message.message[1] << 2) |
>>> + ((message.message[3] & ~0x3f) >> 6);
>>> + y = (message.message[2] << 2) |
>>> + ((message.message[3] & ~0xf3) >> 2);
>>> + area = message.message[4];
>>> +
>>> + dev_dbg(dev, "[%d] %s x: %d, y: %d, area: %d\n", id,
>>> + status & QT602240_MOVE ? "moved" : "pressed",
>>> + x, y, area);
>>> +
>>> + data->finger[id].status = status & QT602240_MOVE ?
>>> + QT602240_MOVE : QT602240_PRESS;
>>> + data->finger[id].x = x;
>>> + data->finger[id].y = y;
>>> + data->finger[id].area = area;
>>> +
>>> + input_report_key(input_dev, BTN_TOUCH, 1);
>>> + input_report_abs(input_dev, ABS_X, x);
>>> + input_report_abs(input_dev, ABS_Y, y);
>>> +
>>> + goto mt_report;
>>> +
>>> +release:
>>> + if (status & QT602240_RELEASE) {
>>> + dev_dbg(dev, "[%d] released\n", id);
>>> +
>>> + data->finger[id].status = QT602240_RELEASE;
>>> + data->finger[id].area = 0;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> +mt_report:
>>> + for (id = 0; id < QT602240_MAX_FINGER; id++) {
>>> + if (!data->finger[id].status)
>>> + continue;
>>> +
>>> + input_report_abs(input_dev, ABS_MT_TRACKING_ID, id);
>>> + input_report_abs(input_dev, ABS_MT_TOUCH_MAJOR,
>>> + data->finger[id].area);
>>> +
>>> + if (data->finger[id].status == QT602240_RELEASE)
>>> + data->finger[id].status = 0;
>>> + else {
>>> + input_report_abs(input_dev, ABS_MT_POSITION_X,
>>> + data->finger[id].x);
>>> + input_report_abs(input_dev, ABS_MT_POSITION_Y,
>>> + data->finger[id].y);
>>> + finger_num++;
>>> + }
>
> The finger[id].status is checked twice in this block, is there any particular
> reason for it?
There is three states press / release / none. The none state means that
the finger weren't be pressed still. First checking is to detect none
state and second checking is to distinguish press and release. Does it
need to report the finger of none state?
> Either way, reporting only a part of the finger properties before
> input_mt_sync() is wrong. Perhaps one can move the second test up together with
> the first one?
>
I don't know well what you mean. Please give me detailed thing.
>>> +
>>> + input_mt_sync(input_dev);
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + if (!finger_num)
>>> + input_report_key(input_dev, BTN_TOUCH, 0);
>
> The lines above can be combined with the first BTN_TOUCH instance to something
> like this:
>
> input_report_key(input_dev, BTN_TOUCH, finger_num > 0);
>
> The input core will not emit the key unless it actually changes.
>
I have a quick question. If finger_num is more than one, should
BTN_TOUCH be reported before ABS_XX event reporting?
>>> + input_sync(input_dev);
>>> + } else {
>>> + qt602240_dump_message(dev, &message);
>>> + qt602240_check_config_error(data, &message, reportid);
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + goto repeat;
> [...]
>>> + __set_bit(EV_ABS, input_dev->evbit);
>>> + __set_bit(EV_KEY, input_dev->evbit);
>>> + __set_bit(BTN_TOUCH, input_dev->keybit);
>>> +
>>> + /* For single touch */
>>> + input_set_abs_params(input_dev, ABS_X, 0, QT602240_MAX_XC, 0,
>>> + 0);
>>> + input_set_abs_params(input_dev, ABS_Y, 0, QT602240_MAX_YC, 0,
>>> + 0);
>>> +
>>> + /* For multi touch */
>>> + input_set_abs_params(input_dev, ABS_MT_TRACKING_ID, 0,
>>> + QT602240_MAX_ID, 0, 0);
>
> What is a normal value for QT602240_MAX_ID? Is it modified every time there is a
> new touch?
>
The ID value range can differ by chip firmware, but it can be calculated
from 0 to 9. ID is decided by touch order. If i pressed three fingers,
IDs ard 0, 1, 2.
>>> + input_set_abs_params(input_dev, ABS_MT_TOUCH_MAJOR, 0,
>>> + QT602240_MAX_AREA, 0, 0);
>>> + input_set_abs_params(input_dev, ABS_MT_POSITION_X, 0,
>>> + QT602240_MAX_XC, 0, 0);
>>> + input_set_abs_params(input_dev, ABS_MT_POSITION_Y, 0,
>>> + QT602240_MAX_YC, 0, 0);
>>> +
>>> + input_set_drvdata(input_dev, data);
> [...]
>
> In general, I think the functions of this driver are too long. Splitting them up
> might do good.
>
OK. i will try code cleaning.
Thanks.
> Thanks!
> Henrik
>
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
